On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 06:02:11PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully > added. > > Anyone have an idea what the behaviour should be here? For passive > would it make sense to accept an interface without link-local?
Is there a specific use case for leaving the interface configured without IPv6 link-local? We use IPv6 extensively, (and are aware of various issues with the OpenBSD IPv6 implementation), but I'm not aware of any advantage or problem that is resolved by deliberately removing or not configuring link-local. If we support this particular case of wg on such an interface, and by extension encourage the general practice, then users with little experience of IPv6 are likely to start shooting themselves in the foot by disabling it on a whim. If there is a problem somewhere that is resolved by removing IPv6 link-local, I'm curious to know what it is.
